1 2026:CGHC:5615 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9728 of 2025 Nitish Kumar S/o Umesh Ravidas Aged About 20 Years R/o Village- Jhundo, P.S.- Khaira (Wrongly Mention As Baira) District- Jamui (Wrongly Spell As Jmoi), Bihar --- Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Doundilohara, District Balod, C.G. --- Respondent(s) MCRC No. 10443 of 2025 Vikash Kumar S/o Guddu Das Aged About 23 Years R/o Beltikari, Post- Kasadi, District Dewkar, Jharkhand . ---Applicant(s) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Doundilohara, District Balod C.G. --- Respondent(s) MCRC No. 612 of 2026 Arvind Kumar S/o Pramod Das Aged About 18 Years R/o Prachi Post Batpar, P.S. Chakai , District- Jamoi Bihar, ---Applicant(s) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Doundilohara, District- Balod (C.G.) KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 --- Respondent(s) MCRC No. 9822 of 2025 Rakesh Kumar S/o Umesh Ravidas, Aged About 23 Years R/o Village- Jhundo, P.S. Khaira (Wrongly Mention As Para) District Jamui (Wrongly Spell As Jmoi) Bihar ---Applicant(s) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Doundilohara, District Balod (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Hemant Gupta, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Priyank Rathi, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 31.01.2026 1. Since the above bail applications are arising out of same crime number and same offence so they are being heard and decided by this common order. 2. The applicants have preferred these First Bail Applications under Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.101/2025, registered at Police Station Doundilohara, District- Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(4), 318(4), 340(2), 3(5) of the BNS & Section 43, 66, 66(C)(D) of the I.T. Act. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that the complainant Dilip Kumar 3 Meshram had an amount of approximately Rs.23,00,000/- deposited in his account maintained with Punjab National Bank, Branch- Dallirajhara, District- Balod. On 22.06.2025, a file purportedly named “PM Kisan App” was circulated in a WhatsApp group of Village Sahagaon Panchayat, which the complainant downloaded by touching the file. Thereafter, from the next day, the tower signal of his mobile number 9644330517 stopped functioning. Subsequently, the applicant approached Lok Seva Kendra, Balod, where he updated his Aadhaar details, completed KYC formalities, and got his mobile number reactivated. Upon checking his PhonePe account, he discovered that amounts were being debited in multiple installments, and between 26.06.2025 and 10.07.2025, an amount of Rs. 12,13,860/- was fraudulently transferred from his bank account. On the written complaint of the complainant, the present crime was registered and, upon completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed before the competent court. 4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have not committed any offence. He further submits that there is no direct allegation against the present applicants and only vague allegations are levelled against them. Looking to the material available on record, prima facie case is not made out against the present applicants. Further, It is contended that the entire prosecution case is based on conjectures and assumptions arising out of digital 4 transactions, without any concrete proof to establish intentional involvement of the applicants in the alleged cyber fraud. Learned counsel further submits that the applicants have not personally gained any wrongful benefit, that the alleged recovery is purely electronic in nature, and that no incriminating material has been seized from their conscious possession. So far as criminal antecedents of the applicants are concerned, applicants namely Nitish Kumar, Rakesh Kumar and Arvind Kumar have no previous criminal antecedents registered against them. However, applicant- Vikas Kumar has only previous criminal antecedent registered against him that too of the year 2021. It is argued that the investigation is already completed, the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, the applicants are languishing in jail since 20.08.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take a while, on these ground learned counsel for the applicants prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail applications and submits that, in compliance with the order dated 05.01.2026 passed by this Court, the Station House Officer, Police Station- Doundilohara, has filed her personal affidavit disclosing the material and evidence collected during investigation against the applicants, which is applicable to all the connected bail matters. It is submitted that the applicants have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 101/2025 registered at Police Station Doundilohara, District Balod, for offences 5 punishable under Sections 317(4), 318(2), 340(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 43, 66, 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, and that their earlier bail applications have already been rejected by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Balod, vide order dated 12.11.2025. Learned State counsel further submits that as per the prosecution case, the complainant was induced to download a malicious application in the name of “PM App”, after which his mobile location was disabled and, since his mobile number was linked with his Punjab National Bank account, fraudulent transactions amounting to Rs.12,13,860/- were carried out between 26.06.2025 and 10.07.2025. During interrogation, accused Vikas Kumar disclosed that he had earlier been involved in a similar offence and, after his release from jail in 2021, he again indulged in cyber fraud in association with accused Arvind Kumar Das and Nitish Kumar Das, adopting a well-organised modus operandi involving the use of malicious APK files, hacking of WhatsApp accounts, generation of e-SIMs, and illegal transfer of funds through various digital card and payment applications. He further admitted his involvement in hacking the complainant Dilip Kumar’s account, receipt of proceeds from the crime, and use of the defrauded amount for personal expenses, including purchase of a mobile phone and payment of vehicle instalments. Pursuant thereto, several incriminating articles, including multiple digital and debit cards, Aadhaar card, mobile phone, and SIM cards, 6 were seized under a seizure memo dated 13.10.2025. Learned counsel also points out that verification of criminal antecedents of the applicants has revealed their involvement in other similar cases, as reflected in the letter dated 12.01.2025 annexed with the affidavit. On the strength of the aforesaid material, it is contended that the applicants are habitual offenders involved in organised cyber fraud, the offences alleged are grave and serious in nature, and if released on bail, there is a strong likelihood of their absconding or indulging in similar offences, and therefore, no case for grant of bail is made out. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the material available on record, and the affidavit filed by the Station House Officer in compliance with the order dated 05.01.2026, this Court finds that the investigation in the present case has already been completed and the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. The evidence relied upon by the prosecution is primarily documentary and electronic in nature, which is already in the custody of the investigating agency, and no further custodial interrogation of the applicants is shown to be necessary. Although serious allegations of cyber fraud have been levelled against the applicants, the guilt of the accused is yet to be established during trial. The applicants have been in judicial custody since 20.08.2025, and the trial is likely to take sufficient 7 time for its conclusion. Accordingly, this Court is of the opinion that the applicants are liable to be released on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail applications of the applicants are allowed. 9. Let applicants, Nitish Kumar, Rakesh Kumar, Vikash Kumar and Arvind Kumar, involved in Crime No.101/2025, registered at Police Station- Doundilohara, District- Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(4), 318(4), 340(2), 3(5) of the BNS & Section 43, 66, 66(C)(D) of the I.T. Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties (each) in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 84 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita is issued and the 8 applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section Section 209 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against them in accordance with law. 10. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal